So…basically you just don’t like the way I play, it seems. Cool, cool.
You know that’s a crappy way to try and read someone though, right?
This is not an honest attempt at engaging with my post. I’m leaning negative on you because of the way you have engaged with Cats based on a meta read I can’t follow. The meta read is also awfully vague and requires some sort of higher level thinking I’m clearly not capable of. The style of your posting (meaning, your combativeness and abrasiveness) cut through the nonsense and I’m totally fine with. But I don’t agree with the main target.
It’s an honest attempt to engage with the honest part of your post.
So…is your scumread based on my scumread of cats, because you don’t understand it?
it is of no consequence except that there was some N0 action and I thought I should say
What do you make of cats’s negative meta read of nanook?
I think I tried explaining it but sure. It’s not based on your Scum read of Cats (since you are not alone in having done this today). It’s based on the fact that almost the entire day you’ve been bashing Cats based on a meta read that seems difficult to grasp. This has also drastically limited your focus. That’s mostly it.
This is an interesting question. I don’t think Cats is entirely basing his vote on his negative read. I think the read is a style clash that Cats has described as something he needs to overcome (and look beyond). However, the overarching read is a problem, I would think, because it’ll cloud your judgment more often than not.
If I had to highlight a difference, it would be that Cats is acknowledging it as a limitation, Nanook is using it as ammunition.
So…in other words, my case/scumread on cats. Gotcha. I just loooooooove being scumread because you can’t grasp my meta read, that’s suuuuper fun and almost certainly going to be accurate. 
The difference is that I’m making an actual meta read, cats is acknowledging a style clash and that they always think I’m scum…and then promptly ignoring that and voting me anyways.
They’re not even really the same thing.
I won’t speak for Cats. I think it’s up to him to clarify why he’s reading you the way he is.
When I use this method, I tend to be right between ~15% and ~30% of the time.
Curious what your sample size there is.
Dude. It’s in the thread.
h
Okay, I have actually said why I am seeing you as scummy above and beyond the fact that I see you style as scummy.
You are placing a lot on a Meta read claim that is, his attitude is different, he is distancing himself.
But when other people express their opinion based on their own many years of experience you belittle it, you put it down, and you are insulting. But of course, if you percieve people as insulting you, once again you start belittling disrepecting them and putting thme down.
That is you play style and it looks scummy disrepectful and abusive.
I am going to explain my scum read of you and it is based on over 5 years expereince and I don’t want to hear a word from you about how it does not apply to you.
I have seen many scum play the game by and looking busy by picking one player and Tunnel Tracking the to Death.
I have seen them do this to the abusive point where the player they have done this too the whole game gives up mafia.
You have No Case on Me.
You Are tunnel tracking to Look Busy
And it is Your Scum tactic.
And that is a far clearly definitive explaination than your wishy washy airy fairy of it’s Meta.
How the fuck do You know my Meta that well from a couple of games and half the time you were not there from the start?
Kind of, ya
Ok thanks. That seems pretty fair
Actually I’m going to have to catch up on the rest of this tomorrow. Back to sleep